N C MAHENDRA Vs. HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the writ. Court is empowered to limit the scope of the lis in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to one or more specific grounds only, at the threshold stage of its admission is the significant question which necessitated this. reference to the Division Bench.

(2.) N. C. Mahendra petitioner was working. as an Executive Engineer under the Haryana State Electricity Board when, on 4th November, 1974; he was placed, under suspension in view of the departmental proceedings a against him. A charge-sheet was duly served on him on the l3th January; 1975 and after the completion of the enquiry; that followed, he was. served with a show cause notice as to why his three increments be not stopped with cumulative effect. On 11th July; 1977 he submitted a reply thereto, As averred by him, no punishment was inflicted on him and later he was promoted to the post of the Superintending Engineer vide order, Annexure P: 2, dated the l3th of September, l977. He was to remain on probation for a period of one year therefrom.

(3.) Later on the 2nd Dec., 1977, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation annexure P. B, to the respondent authorities claiming that he should be promoted with. retrospective effect from a back date when persons junior to him were promoted and as a consequential relief his seniority vis-a-vis his colleagues. be altered accordingly and the benefits regarding pay and allowances again with retrospective effect he given to him. According to the petitioner, the date from which he claimed at1 these benefits retrospectively worked to he the l6th May, 1974. In reply to this representation he was informed by respondent No. 1 vide annexure P. 9 dated the 7th July, 1978 that his claim for pay and allowances with retrospective effect was ill-founded as he had not worked during that Period. in the promoted rank. However his request for promotion with retrospective effect and seniority were kept under consideration. It would appear that. the petitioner's case was duly considered by the Haryana State Electricity Board at its meeting on the 9th September, 1977 which resolved as under:-